----- Original Message ----- > From: Maciej Sumiński <[email protected]> > To: KiCad Developers <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 6:27 AM > Subject: [Kicad-developers] Footprints licence > >T here was an interesting question asked on the #kicad irc channel: as > there is the GPL licence note (COPYRIGHT.txt) included in the library > repository, how does it affect PCBs created with the libraries? Are the > boards created using the library repository also licenced under the GPL? > As footprints are stored in .kicad_pcb files, it could be compared to > static linking of GPL software libraries, so the whole design should be > licenced under the GPL. Am I right or different rules apply? > > Regards, > Orson >
As an example, the GPLv3 claims to be "for software and other works" so I would avoid using any footprint with GPLv3. However, it is not clear to me whether a footprint copyright can be enforced or not - in principle it can, but how many sensible variations can you have on, say, a DIP6 footprint? If I converted an Eagle footprint, is this a derived work or not? Anyway, since it's not a clear case one way or the other it would be best to avoid the footprint. In my own work with parametric VRML models, the models are released with a permissive license (and no explicit copyright statement - something of an oversight) since for me nothing else makes sense unless I wanted to sell access to such models. If KiCad is to distribute footprints etc, I think footprints should only be accepted if there are no GPLv3-like restrictions. - Cirilo _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
